RAF interested in fitting booms to Voyager tanker fleet

[plans123]

The Royal Air Force has expressed interest in fitting its Voyager tanker aircraft with a boom, “if the funding can be sourced”, a senior official has said.

Deputy Commander of Operations Air Marshal Greg Bagwell said at the FIDAE Airshow in Santiago in March that the operational case for equipping at least some of the UK’s Voyagers with a boom had already been accepted.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/raf-interested-fitting-booms-voyager-tanker-fleet/?

If only someone had some 'radical' thinking at the outset to buy the A330 MRTT with boom.......

[MaverickPrime]

Seems like a no brainer, C17, Rivet Joint, P8 and maybe picking up a few A model F35s in the future, not to mention interoperability.

Although, hope someone also does some more radical thinking and realises that the voyager should be able to top up its own tanks inflight!

[Pontius Navigator]

Maverick, you meant sucking its own . . .

[Fonsini]

Voyager can't tank from another aircraft ??

So no more Black Buck options for the Falklands then.

[Just This Once...]

Seems like a no brainer, C17, Rivet Joint, P8 and maybe picking up a few A model F35s in the future, not to mention interoperability.

Although, hope someone also does some more radical thinking and realises that the voyager should be able to top up its own tanks inflight!
If it gets a boom it will be able to take fuel from USAF tankers (and a loose handful of other nations) so an improvement all-round.

[vascodegama]

JTO

Not a given-the boom is the giving bit. Pity we didn't go for the MRTT. Remind me what the Aussies said PFI stands for!

[BEagle]

PFI - 'Poms are F*cking Idiots!'.

So which of the 7 x 2-point KC2, 5 x 3-point KC3, 2 x 'fitted for' KC3 Voyagers, none of which have either receptacles or probes, would be fitted with booms?

Training up UK boom operators from scratch wouldn't be the only training issue - maintaining proficiency would be another significant problem.

As for taking on fuel using the 'reverse flow' technique from USAF tankers, does the KC-30A have that capability? Or would it be another UK-only requirement if the Voyager didn't have a receptacle?

Modifying the mission system wouldn't be much of an issue though, given that it still doesn't work anyway....

[vascodegama]

In answer to your second question Beags-no!

[Just This Once...]

JTO

Not a given-the boom is the giving bit. Pity we didn't go for the MRTT. Remind me what the Aussies said PFI stands for!
Not just a giving bit as the boom works both ways; so if a receiver (eg Rivet Joint) comes off-station with spare fuel it can give it back to the tanker through the boom.

Using the boom in reverse is a good way for a tanker to scavenge fuel from others, keeping it on station whilst sending other home with just the fuel they need. Having a tanker with a fuel receptical on the roof is also rather handy.

[vascodegama]

JTO

The KC30A RAAF doesn't have that capability either way ( according to their SRD).

[MaverickPrime]

Maverick, you meant sucking its own . . .

Ironic yes, but I was thinking along the lines of what Fonsini said about the Black Buck op.

Also, never knew you could take fuel as well as receive via the boom, seems like an excellent asset to have in my opinion!

[Davef68]

If only someone had some 'radical' thinking at the outset to buy the A330 MRTT with boom.......

They did, it was salami-sliced off as a cost saving in the early days of FSTA (as we only had two aircraft boom capable, one also had a probe (E3) and one didn't need IFR for it's planned operations (C17)).

[Pontius Navigator]

But surely pushing fuel up hill will require the 'receiver' to be modified to do that, or will it suck it up? Even then would the receivers need modification to allow back flow?

One is reminded if the Valiant which was capable of 100% fuel transfer.

[ian16th]

PN

One is reminded if the Valiant which was capable of 100% fuel transfer. When 214 did the trials.

Our crews used to pass fuel back and forth between themselves, and the game was to find a reason to land after passing fuel to your partner.

Leaving him to burn off enough fuel to land.

Also when we did the trials with the RN, there was a picture in the crew room of a Valiant receiving from a Sea Vixen. Someone had placed a cartoonists balloon on the Sea Vixen with the words, 'Please don't suck!'

[hoodie]

There's a picture been posted on here before of a Tristar 'receiving' from a Buccaneer buddy pod. Anyone got a link to it?

[Pontius Navigator]

Ian, same game with a 'dry' prod; see how much you could lose each time.

[Pontius Navigator]

Hoodie http://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/443958-bucc-tanking-tristar.html

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_2ngGMeMjjLI/TWo1Z46jJ6I/AAAAAAAAA8U/g6duibuyWG0/s640/Bucc%20Tanks%20Tristar.jpg

[DaveW]

Great. :) Thanks, PN.